Confused developer

[Tom hicks]

Well, just when I thought I was getting the hang of this I got some overly bright images . Tri-x 400 shot at 320 dev with microdol 78 degrees at 8 min I know the temp was off but I shortened it by 2 min . Did I still over cook it.

I have been developing at undiluted strengths. I think the first one is ok for most everything being white or clear. All shot in bright shade in garage except for #1

Tom

 

[Leigh Youdale]

Looks OK to me. Bear in mind that time/temp conversions aren't always linear in their relationship and 78F compared to the recommended 68F is probably not a great idea. You might end up with reticulation or simply have the emulsion melt!
Any reason why you didn't cool the brew in a water bath or the fridge?

 

[Thomas-Paris]

It looks like a mediocre scan of a negative that would probably print just fine. If you're only scanning, then you might want to expose a little less or develop a little less to better adapt to what your scanner can handle; or you can adjust the curves in photoshop to bring the highlights down a little. I've done that in the attached image, and it looks okay to me.

 

[Thomas-Paris]

78 F is 25,5 C, which is not one of the temperatures Kodak gives times for, but is hardly at risk of destroying the film. I would have cooled things down to an even 24 C, just for consistency, but there is no need to always develop everything at 20 C !!

 

[Tom hicks]

Ok I went back and shot another roll at some of the same subjects but with a different camera , I know another variable .:bang: Two thing s, my exposures were off by 1.5 stops overexposed and my developing time was to long . I'm taking the temp of the dev. out of the equation at this time .

Here are some more shot with my Canon QL 17 , Tri-X 400 and Microdol-x at same temp of 78 but shortened the dev time to 6 min instead of 8. Same lighting conditions , bright shade.

 

[Tom hicks]

Two other shots one side light and one heavy shade . None of my shots have been with any filters . With some of the subjects I think the filter would help with the graduation of the tones, as the film sees some of this as the same when it's not , so I have a lot of bright areas that could have more range if a filter was used . Your thoughts ?

 

[mathomas]

Two other shots one side light and one heavy shade . None of my shots have been with any filters . With some of the subjects I think the filter would help with the graduation of the tones, as the film sees some of this as the same when it's not , so I have a lot of bright areas that could have more range if a filter was used . Your thoughts ?

Everything you've posted thus far looks fine to me. It's all within some adjustment-to-taste in your image editor of choice. Personally I'm coming to like higher-key images than I used to, so many of these are right up my alley.

 

[Chinasaur]

Either way..I like the bright look.. kinda Kubricky 'end of 2001' type look... 🙂

 

[Vics]

Tom, I was born and raised in DFW, and I know how hot it is there, but I still don't understand why you don't standardize at 68 deg. That's what I did all those years in Irving and Arlington. Cool everything down to 68, then standardize all your procedures: time, temp, developer, (why Microdol?), agitation. This is a laboratory procedure. Scientific method. Only change one thing at a time, so you'll always know the cause and effect of every change. I know it's just too hot to think! Have some iced tea. PS, I like D-76 with Tri-X 1:1. Enjoy.